I like Buells: They're unique and thoughtfully desinged by individuals and not committees. They're undeniably mechanical in a way that's rare in this sanitary age of mechaincal sameness. They're torquey in an instant yank on your sockets kind of way. They're even ecconomical and reliable, but don't tell anyone about that.

Most importantly, they're designed by that rare breed of engineer who understands mechanical dynamics and reveres physics over fashion. The result is a chassis that works in spades.

If you can't keep an early Buell running don't whine about it here. Go buy an XB12. It'll be more reliable than a BMW.

I always liked the look of those older style Buells over the new ones. Those S3's are sweet bikes. I wish they would come out with something like it again, with better quality control, but they have so much sunk into the new design I doubt we are going to see much.

Still, I'll keep my fingers crossed.

__________________
Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote!
--Benjamin Franklin

I always liked the look of those older style Buells over the new ones. Those S3's are sweet bikes. I wish they would come out with something like it again, with better quality control, but they have so much sunk into the new design I doubt we are going to see much.

Still, I'll keep my fingers crossed.

I believe it's Buell's intention for the Ully to fill the void left by the S3. Makes sense to me. It's an excellent all-surface sport touring bike with lots of room for people and gear and nice amenities for serious mileage. Don't let the dirt bike face fool you: It'll burn up a twisty road as sharp or sharper than an S3.

These things handle like crazy which makes them an absolute blast to ride.

A local bike mag journo raced a Buell for a few years and remarked that the front end felt like it was "welded to the track". He placed well in a national series and said in two years of racing he'd NEVER pushed/washed the front end. That sort of thing builds the kind of chassis confidence that inspires very impressive corner speeds.

I like Buells: They're unique and thoughtfully desinged by individuals and not committees. They're undeniably mechanical in a way that's rare in this sanitary age of mechaincal sameness. They're torquey in an instant yank on your sockets kind of way. They're even ecconomical and reliable, but don't tell anyone about that.

Most importantly, they're designed by that rare breed of engineer who understands mechanical dynamics and reveres physics over fashion. The result is a chassis that works in spades.

If you can't keep an early Buell running don't whine about it here. Go buy an XB12. It'll be more reliable than a BMW.

So drop on by and leave a jpeg or two for those who "get it".

SHOW US YOUR BUELLS!

I'm at the in-laws for the weekend, so I can't post pics. I had to sell my 97 Thunderbolt a few years ago for financial reasons. I hated doing it and I still miss her. I've never ridden another bike that felt so connected to the road. Throwing it into a corner just felt natural. The sound of the engine always put a smile on my face.

First I heard of Buell was '89ish, iirc, Nick Iesnacht (sp?) of Motorcyclist magazine was testing a model similar to yours. It impressed me then as a clever approach to motorcycling: Mass centralization, low unsprung weight, useable power at useful engine speeds etc.

That bike basically laid the chassis foundations for Buell for the next decade. And that bike was based on his race chassis that dated back to '83 or so.

FWIW, It took the "Big 4" until the mid '90's to approach those sort of chassis dimensions on a production bike when Yamaha introduced it's first R6's.

I also have the Blast. After 2 days and 50 miles 2 up (at 40-50 Deg F), it really is a lot nicer than my KLR250 for 2 up and for going over 60mph. Oh, it still looks just like the picture in the brochure. At least until the new parts show up.

Paul

__________________
"My mother always told me you had to be very smart or very pleasant to succeed. I tried smart for 35 years, pleasant is much better." Elwood P. Dowd